Search

Social media

Become a Fan

Animals Have Issues Too

April 12, 2016

Apparently I haven't done enough to educate my fellow Americans about the environmental benefits of eating less meat. A recent study examined beliefs about climate change and the efficacy of actions around diet and other strategies in the US and the Netherlands. One of the authors of that study, Annick de Witt, summed it up:

We presented representative groups of more than 500 people in both countries with three food-related options (eat less meat; eat local and seasonal produce; and eat organic produce) and three energy-related options (drive less; save energy at home; and install solar panels). We asked them whether they were willing to make these changes in their own lives, and whether they already did these things. While a majority of the surveyed people recognized meat reduction as an effective option for addressing climate change, the outstanding effectiveness of this option, in comparison to the other options, was only clear to 6% of the US population, and only 12% of the Dutch population.

Only 6% of Americans knew about the "outstanding effectiveness" of reducing meat to combat climate change. (Notice this is merely reducing meat, not eliminating it altogether.)

A global transition to a low meat-diet as recommended for health reasons would reduce the mitigation costs to achieve a 450 ppm CO2-eq. stabilisation target by about 50% in 2050 compared to the reference case.

In other words, without reducing the meat in our diets, we’ll have to find those savings in greenhouse gas emissions somewhere else.

Emissions from livestock account for as much greenhouse gases as the entire fleet of cars, trains, ships and airplanes throughout the world. No one loves cows more than I do, but clearly the world would be better off if there were fewer of them. Lots fewer of them. (With 1.4 billion cows in the world, we could stand to lose quite a few before anyone would notice the lack of bovine beauty on our hillsides.)

And in fact, those hillsides and pastures currently occupied by cows could be filled with carbon-reducing trees. If we’re going to keep greenhouse gas levels low —so that temperatures rise below 2C degrees, or even 1.5C as scientists are currently advising—we need to plant trees to recapture that carbon we've already released. Lots of trees. Billions of trees. So freeing up the 80% of the world's land that is currently occupied by my friends the cows, sheep, pigs, and chickens (and the crops they consume) and replacing them with trees and other vegetation would go a long way toward fixing our little problem with climate change.

One reason cows and other ruminants produce so much greenhouse gas is that the gas they produce is methane, not CO2 (carbon dioxide). And the impact of methane is over 25 times as great as CO2. But because methane has a shorter “lifespan” than CO2, the good news is that removing it will have a sooner impact. So all those meatless meals will make the atmosphere that much cleaner, in, oh, about 12 years!

Even worse than methane is nitrous oxide, which is produced by the manure of all those livestock. And nitrous oxide is a major player in greenhouse gas—it’s hundreds of times more potent than CO2. Manure from livestock accounts for a whopping 65% of human-related nitrous oxide. That gives new ewww to poo.

What about eating local? Eating a plant-based diet one day a week—the equivalent of taking 273 cars off the road—has more impact than eating local seven days a week. If you multiply by seven, you can get an idea of the benefits of a completely plant-based diet. But hey, you could do both! Try eating local, plant-based food from your farmer’s market whenever possible.

The study points to another factor that may influence people's knowledge of the destructiveness of eating meat:

People who already eat less meat may be more open to hear and retain information on the climate impacts of meat, while people who eat lots of meat may be more inclined to deny or downplay it.

Does this ring a bell? Push any buttons? Clichés aside, it struck a chord with me: I happen to like eating sugar very much, and there's an inconvenient amount of research saying sugar isn't very good for you. I ignore it. Why? Because I like sugar and don't want to feel guilty when I eat it. I don't want to change my ways. This, I suspect, is true of many meat eaters as well, including many people who consider themselves environmentalists.

The author of the piece goes on to suggest several ways to make this realization more, well, palatable. She suggests moving "beyond finger pointing tactics" and focusing on the empowering message of meat reduction.

And, "while environmental behaviors often involve sacrifices, the meat-reduction option offers a range of personal benefits." What are these personal benefits? For me, it's the huge savings in calories that would otherwise be delivered by the meat on my plate. (Did I mention I love sugar? I would much rather eat a few Oreos after dinner than eat a hunk of meat as part of my meal.) There's also the wide variety of plants at my disposal, a diversity I didn't know about before I started exploring vegan and vegetarian cooking. I ate quinoa and kale long before hipsters noticed it, I was making risotto before gastro pubs were even a thing, and I ate cactus long before Wegman's started selling it in their produce department.

I like my food cutting edge.

But the best benefit, and the real reason I switched to a vegan diet, was because I hated the guilt I felt every time I ate meat. Even before I lived next door to cows—indeed, from the time I first knew where the meat on my plate came from—I knew there was suffering involved in raising and killing animals for food. I avoided that information, too, during my meat-eating days, because I didn't need any more guilt. Now, I merely feel a huge sense of relief every time I come across one of those shock videos online.

These concrete cows release much less methane than the real thing.

So yeah, I get it—I know why my environmentalist friends don't want to know more about the huge environmental costs of their diets and the “outstanding effectiveness” of eliminating even some meat. But the fact that only 6% of Americans do know this, when around 40% consider themselves environmentalists, tells me I haven't done enough to educate my circle of friends. (Yes, I take these things very personally.)

Consumption and lifestyles therefore tend to be shaped more by people collectively than individually. The most effective strategies thus engage people in groups, and give them opportunities to develop their understanding and narratives about food in dialog together.

Well, I have a blog, a few hundred cookbooks, and several social media accounts. If anyone is prepared to help people develop a narrative about food, it's me—well, me and a few hundred food bloggers who focus on plant-based cooking. As a plant enthusiast, I want to share my love of beans and fennel and farro. (But not avocado. Never avocado.)

So join the avocado-free Zeitgeist! And save the planet one meal at a time!

Do you want to know more about the link between livestock and greenhouse gas emissions? Try Chatham House, a think tank in the UK that's been studying this for a while. Prefer your info from the American side of the pond, and in video form? Try Johns Hopkins. And if you like a little conspiracy flavor with your facts, try Cowspiracy.

August 05, 2013

Where should beef grow? In a lab, or in a pasture? (Make mine with plants, please!)

Today the world's first stem cell burger will be eaten in London (right about now, as a matter of fact). The €250,000 project was bankrolled by Google's Sergey Brin, who funded the Maastricht lab that produced the cow muscle fibers used in the burger. That pricetag is only the beginning: other labs will undoubtedly need to be funded and much further research and testing done before anythiing truly resembling and tasting like meat will be available.

For someone who consumes a plant-based diet, the idea of eating a cruelty-free piece of meat is a yawner. I'm perfectly happy with my diet the way it is, with plenty of meat substitutes available without the high pricetag. The mock meats already available are really, really, good, frankly. I just had a sandwich made from Vegusto deli slices. I'd bet my right arm anyone would find it better than Oscar Meyer bologna or—horrors!—picnic loaf. Other mock meats, available in Europe, the UK, or the US—but rarely all three—are also pretty darn good.

True, they haven't managed to reproduce the gristle in that Salisbury steak you had for dinner last night—but then that's a good thing! One of the last meat meals I remember was smothered steak I was served at a dinner party. I had to figure out a way to unobtrusively spit out the wad of gristle in my mouth. Is it any wonder I became vegetarian shortly afterward?

And then there's the "grisly" aspect of meat: along with all the chemical additives (many of which aren't even included in the label) you're getting blood, feces, bacteria, hormones, antibiotics, and years' worth of toxins the animal has breathed or injested during its lifetime. Every time I'd drive past a pasture full of cows next to an interstate, I'd wonder just how healthy their meat or milk was, after they breathed in all those petrol fumes day in day out for seven or eight years. The ammonia in the so-called "pink slime" that MacDonald's packages as burgers is the least of your worries.

And we know how many of you were grossed out by pink slime—I read all about it, admittedly with some schadenfreude, on my Facebook timeline for months. Mass producing animals for food is inherently an unsavory prospect. And worse, the run-off from factory farms affects nearby vegetable farms, too. So even if you eat only plants, you're at risk of ingesting some deadly pathogen from the factory farm upstream from the spinach field where your salad was grown.

So is test tube meat any worse than what you find in the meat aisle at your supermarket? It can't possibly be any grosser, in my book.

Yet I don't have any plans to eat test tube meat. I'd eagerly consume Beyond Meat, a non-meat "meat" currently sold in the US, if it ever became widely available. I've had Gardein before, and Quorn (made from mycoprotein) and my kids grew up eating Morningstar Farms products instead of bacon. I use soy crumbles instead of hamburger meat in dishes and eat Linda McCartney Red Onion and Rosemary Sausages on lazy weekend mornings. There are so many mock meats I have yet to try—why would I bother pining for a test tube burger?

I suspect the percentage of the world's population who want to avoid meat have already figured out a way to do so, and the rest, well, they're not going to be convinced by replica meat that's grown in a lab. Like the saying goes, where there's a will, there's a way. The problem is not lack of ways to go about avoiding meat; the problem is lack of will for most people.

But in the future, the percentage of meat-avoiders will increase, as meat becomes a scarce resource and is carbon-priced out of the range of most people's pocketbooks. With 30% of the world's surface already used as pasture, it's just not possible to feed the world any more meat from animal sources than it already demands.

Maybe some of those would-be meat eaters will turn to test tube meat. But before they do that, they really ought to try a bite of my sandwich...at 33 pence per slice, I'm certain their pocketbooks won't be put off by my deli slices. Or their tastebuds.

UPDATE: The burger has been consumed! One taster said she "missed salt and pepper." I can relate. This is Britain, remember.

January 18, 2012

As long as I'm posting videos in the "cute livestock/dog interaction" genre, I might as well include this one someone pointed me to on Facebook: A boxer greets a herd of cows.

Now, I've seen plenty of cows in my lifetime (well, the last few years, since I moved to this cow-ridden country) and I've seen many, many dogs, and I've even seen cows and dogs together. But I've never seen anything quite like the cow/dog interaction in this video.

It will blow your mind, melt your heart, and have you thinking of a few more clichés.

Go ahead, watch it if you haven't already. (In which case your heart is already melted and you are probably seeking medical attention right now.)

April 29, 2010

We've had a bit of drama in the back garden this week. It's like a soap opera, or maybe Desperate Housewives (Desperate Ducks?).

The other afternoon I noticed the male and female ducks out back at the bird feeder, where they eat the seeds that have dropped to the ground. But Mrs. Duck was acting strange. She seemed agitated, waving her tail feathers madly, then charging the male duck, quacking furiously at him, veering off before she reached him. He just looked on helplessly, a harried husband who can't seem to please his wife no matter what he does.

I wondered what was going on. Was she getting ready to lay eggs? Was she perhaps regretting her choice of mate? I also wondered why I hadn't noticed the bright white cravat the male duck sported on his chest. The bright markings of the males of the species are so much more striking than the non-descript females—does this help them attract a mate? What would a female duck find attractive, I mused—a guy with a teal green head? Burnt orange feet? Or was physical attractiveness less important than a clever quip—err, quack?

Later, as we were sitting down to dinner on the patio, three quacking ducks flew off the roof and over the back garden, then landed in the pasture. My husband grabbed the binoculars (doesn't everyone keep a pair of binoculars on the table?) and informed me there were now two males and one female.

Even from there I could spot the white cravat on one of the males—he was not, it turned out, the original mate of Mrs. Duck! An impostor Mister! She was angry at him because he was the wrong duck!

He must have been cruising the bars—back gardens—in hopes of scoring. A little extra-nest affair was what he was after.

Later, I watched from the kitchen while I put away the dishes. Mr. and Mrs. Duck were back, this time, the RIGHT Mr. Duck. He stood especially tall, his beautiful, understated, brown neck craned upward as he eyed the corner of the yard, where no doubt Mr. Goodbar lurked, hoping to entice Mrs. Duck into an illicit relationship. She contentedly pecked the grass for seeds, her earlier agitation forgotten.

I'm glad my ducks are faithful to their vows. It might not be so good for ratings, but they seem happy.

January 22, 2010

I went to Athens to forget about my dog. Of course, I know that's impossible, but I didn't expect so many four-legged reminders of my recent and painful loss.

I had read that Athens had a problem with stray dogs, but it wasn't until we headed up from the hotel to the Acropolis that I encountered so many friendly, and seemingly homeless, strays. I say seemingly, because they actually seem to have made the Acropolis and the surrounding area their home.

It turns out the dogs are rounded up periodically by the City of Athens and given veterinary care, sterilized, and microchipped. They're also given a collar saying as such, which explains why so many dogs had collars. They also, without exception, looked well fed. Some, including the old white dog who slept on the rug outside our hotel entrance, were even overweight.

Still, my heart went out to every dog I met, especially the lovely dog at Hadrian's Library, who seemed to be something of a mascot to the preservationists working on the site. They don't pay entrance fees to any of the sites, and despite signs warning that dogs aren't allowed, they enter without being stopped, curling up on marble paths warmed by the sun.

Near the Temple of the Olympian Zeus, we saw a gang of dogs suddenly rush out into the street to bark at a moped. They surrounded the rider, barking, ignoring the other traffic. When the traffic started moving, our hearts lurched as they made their way between cars and buses back to the park. This was the only nuisance behavior I noticed.

Later, I watched a dog wait patiently at a crosswalk, only to cross the street with the humans who crossed when the light turned green. They've obviously learned coping skills, living on the streets.

But still, living on the streets is no life for a dog. They deserve a home, with humans to call their own.

I couldn't decide on one or two photos, so I posted most of the photos, below, that we took of the street dogs of Athens. If you see one you want, contact the City of Athens. Or your local shelter probably has one just like him.

October 08, 2009

It's that time of year. October is when thoughts turn to Thanksgiving, and what kind of turkey we'll have. Will it be wide-wattled Bubbles? Or Rhonda, with her pale pink wattle? Gideon is awfully pretty too, but he's in California—a bit far from our shores.

Of course I'm talking about adopting a turkey from Farm Sanctuary, and fortunately, the turkeys stay right where they are—being cared for in a loving environment at either the Watkins Glen sanctuary in New York, or in California. The adoption fee helps provide care for the turkeys that have found their way to the sanctuary rather than a dinner table. As you can see from the photo above, the turkeys love Turkey Day at the sanctuary!

More photos of the adopted turkeys enjoying Thanksgiving are here, and if you'd like to sponsor a turkey, go to Adoptaturkey.org. Each adoption is only $25, and you'll receive (if you opt to) a certificate with a photo of your turkey, suitable for framing.

Adopted turkeys are lovely gifts, too, for animal lovers you love. Each year my daughters get two turkeys. (You might remember Daughter Number Two's reaction the first year I told her we were adopting a turkey. "Does Dad know?!" she asked, alarmed at the prospect of a turkey coming to live with us. These days she's a little more sanguine.)

If you'd like to adopt a turkey, I warn you: it's a tough decision. But if you really can't decide, you can adopt the whole flock, for $150!

November 18, 2008

On Saturday we took our usual walk through the nearby wood. I turned the corner but after a minute or two, I realized the dog wasn't behind me. I turned to see her standing at alert, tail high but still. I looked to see what she was afraid of. Two English sheep dogs were coming toward her on the opposite path. "It's okay, they're your friends," I told her in a reassuring tone, but what do I know—I'm not a dog. Then the smaller, younger, of the two came toward her, tail wagging, and they exchanged sniffs. All was well.

We continued on our walk, with the two sheepdogs in front of us. It was then I noticed the larger of the two dogs had no tail. Not even a nub. Not a hint of a tail. It must have been an accident. Tail docking is no longer legal here, except in certain circumstances, but even a docked tail retains a stub. This one had nothing there. And I realized that was what the problem was earlier: The older dog had no way of telling my dog that she (or he) was friendly, and my dog was naturally being cautious, standing at alert attention until the larger dog's intentions could be discovered.

Dogs use their tails like a signal flag on a ship. In a dog book I have the author tells of his two Dalmations, one with a docked tail, the other with an intact tail. Despite the fact the docked tail female was the less aggressive of the two, the author had noticed she invariably was perceived by other dogs to be the more aggressive. A cautionary tale—excuse the pun—for those who'd like to dock a pup's tail.

Dogs only wag their tails when someone—human or animal—is around to see
it, a hint that it's an entirely social and purposeful reaction. Nature has
enhanced some dogs' tails, like mine, with light colored hair that is
easier for other dogs and humans to notice. That's why so many dogs, pure
bred and mixed breed alike, have white tips at the ends of their tails.

There are subtle differences in tail wags: recent research has shown that dogs wag their tails to the right when greeting their owners; to the left when facing an unfamiliar, possibly aggressive dog. The position of the tail also signals exactly how excited or relaxed a dog is, or whether they see themselves as "top dog" or in a more submissive role. Bristling tail hair is a sign of imminent aggression, while a broad, rapid tail wag means "I love you and want to lick you all over!"

Sadly, tail docking is still done by many breeders for aesthetic reasons, but it's unspeakably cruel—literally. With no long tail to wave in the air, dogs are left with little way of communicating. The pain may be over soon, but the deficit lingers on, as I saw on my walk Saturday.

The beluga whales of Alaska's Cook Inlet are endangered and require additional protection to survive, the government declared Friday, contradicting Gov. Sarah Palin who has questioned whether the distinctive white whales are actually declining.

Who could possibly not want to see beluga whales survive?

The government on Friday put a portion of the whales on the endangered list, rejecting Palin's argument that it lacked scientific evidence to do so. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said that a decade-long recovery program had failed to ensure the whales' survival.

We all know of course what the real problem is here for Palin and her friends: Beluga whales eat salmon. And her husband is a part-time commercial fisherman.

There's a reason why the Humane Society endorsed Barack Obama for president. In fact, there are a whole list of reasons—you can read his response to their questionnaire here (pdf). And you can read their endorsement here.

October 19, 2008

I did a double take when I passed this electronics shop in Toulouse, then backed up and snapped a photo. I saw lots of dogs while I was there. Most were mixed breeds, large short-haired dogs of vaguely Alsatian heritage. And also a fair number of tiny Yorkies, trotting along after their madames, dodging high heels.

I did see one Golden Retriever, while I waited for my boat trip to depart. She was in the park next to the dock, nosing for nibbles on the ground. True to the breed, I must say: always looking for a croissant crumb.

September 23, 2008

I don't think there's really any doubt who to vote for in November, but if you're still on the fence, here's the endorsement by the Humane Society, which usually doesn't endorse presidential candidates. This year, animal welfare truly does seem to be on the line:

I'm proud to announce today that the HSLF board of directors -- which is comprised of both Democrats and Republicans -- has voted unanimously to endorse Barack Obama for President. The Obama-Biden ticket is the better choice on animal protection, and we urge all voters who care about the humane treatment of animals, no matter what their party affiliation, to vote for them.

Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) has been a solid supporter of animal protection at both the state and federal levels. As an Illinois state senator, he backed at least a dozen animal protection laws, including those to strengthen the penalties for animal cruelty, to help animal shelters, to promote spaying and neutering, and to ban the slaughter of horses for human consumption. In the U.S. Senate, he has consistently co-sponsored multiple bills to combat animal fighting and horse slaughter, and has supported efforts to increase funding for adequate enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act, Humane Methods of Slaughter Act, and federal laws to combat animal fighting and puppy mills.

In his response to the HSLF questionnaire, he pledged support for nearly every animal protection bill currently pending in Congress, and said he will work with executive agencies such as the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Department of the Interior to make their policies more humane. He wrote of the important role animals play in our lives, as companions in our homes, as wildlife in their own environments, and as service animals working with law enforcement and assisting persons with disabilities. He also commented on the broader links between animal cruelty and violence in society.

Obama has even on occasion highlighted animal protection issues on the campaign trail, and has spoken publicly about his support for animal protection. In reaction to the investigation showing the abuse of sick and crippled cows which earlier this year led to the largest meat recall in U.S. history, he issued a statement saying "that the mistreatment of downed cows is unacceptable and poses a serious threat to public health." He is featured in Jana Kohl's book about puppy mills, A Rare Breed of Love, with a photo of Obama holding Baby (shown above), the three-legged poodle rescued from an abusive puppy mill operation, and his political mentor, Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), is the author of the latest federal bill to crack down on puppy mills.

Importantly, Obama's running mate, Sen. Joe Biden (D-Del.) has been a stalwart friend of animal welfare advocates in the Senate, and has received high marks year after year on the Humane Scorecard. Biden has not only supported animal protection legislation during his career, but has also led the fight on important issues. He was the co-author with Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) in the 108th Congress on legislation to ban the netting of dolphins by commercial tuna fishermen. He was the lead author of a bill in the 107th Congress to prohibit trophy hunting of captive exotic mammals in fenced enclosures, and he successfully passed the bill through the Senate Judiciary Committee.

On the Republican ticket, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) has also supported some animal protection bills in Congress, but has been inattentive or opposed to others. He has voted for and co-sponsored legislation to stop horse slaughter, and voted to eliminate a $2 million subsidy for the luxury fur coat industry. But he has largely been absent on other issues, and has failed to co-sponsor a large number of priority bills or sign onto animal protection letters that have had broad support in the Senate.

The McCain campaign did not fill out the HSLF presidential questionnaire, and has also not issued any public statements on animal welfare issues. He was silent during the downed animal scandal and beef recall, which played out during a high-point in the primary fight. Yet he did speak at the NRA convention earlier this year, and is the keynote speaker this weekend in Columbus, Ohio, at the U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance rally—an extremist organization that defends the trophy hunting of threatened polar bears and captive shooting of tame animals inside fenced pens.

While McCain's positions on animal protection have been lukewarm, his choice of running mate cemented our decision to oppose his ticket. Gov. Sarah Palin's (R-Alaska) retrograde policies on animal welfare and conservation have led to an all-out war on Alaska's wolves and other creatures. Her record is so extreme that she has perhaps done more harm to animals than any other current governor in the United States.

Palin engineered a campaign of shooting predators from airplanes and helicopters, in order to artificially boost the populations of moose and caribou for trophy hunters. She offered a $150 bounty for the left foreleg of each dead wolf as an economic incentive for pilots and aerial gunners to kill more of the animals, even though Alaska voters had twice approved a ban on the practice. This year, the issue was up again for a vote of the people, and Palin led the fight against it -- in fact, she helped to spend $400,000 of public funds to defeat the initiative.

What's more, when the Bush Administration announced its decision to list the polar bear as threatened under the Endangered Species Act, Palin filed a lawsuit to reverse that decision. She said it's the "wrong move" to protect polar bears, even though their habitat is shrinking and ice floes are vanishing due to global warming.

The choice for animals is especially clear now that Palin is in the mix. If Palin is put in a position to succeed McCain, it could mean rolling back decades of progress on animal issues.

Voters who care about protecting wildlife from inhumane and unsporting abuses, enforcing the laws that combat large-scale cruelties like dogfighting and puppy mills, providing humane treatment of animals in agriculture, and addressing other challenges that face animals in our nation, must become active over the next six weeks to elect a president and vice president who share our values. Please spread the word, and tell friends and family members that an honest assessment of the records of the two presidential tickets leads to the inescapable conclusion that Obama-Biden is the choice for humane-minded voters.

September 21, 2008

I admit, I've joined in when otherbloggers make fun of people who think floating down a river in a raft until they come upon a moose, and then shooting it in the lungs and tracking it down to where it finally falls is great sport.

I think moose hunting is about as sportsmanlike as squishing caterpillars, but what do I know? I've only come upon a moose once in the wild. Perhaps they're actually quite agile and fierce.

This video, showing the viciousness of a mother moose and her twins when under attack by a water sprinkler, may change your mind about moose hunting. I dunno; watch it and see.

May 18, 2008

I'm always happy to read about advances in the search for a cure for Huntington's Disease, but this struck me as awful news: Scientists have inserted the defective gene into monkeys.

It's bad enough humans have to suffer this disease. Now another species will suffer the same incapacitation. One of the monkeys who was altered is already showing signs of HD at 10 months. While humans are in many ways genetically identical to monkeys (the percentage of similarity varies with the species) we are not identical, nor do we learn in the same way or share cognitive traits with monkeys. Therefore, drug trials on monkeys will be of little use, except for the scientists who were offered grant money to alter rhesus monkey genes.

I have a better idea. Test drugs in humans who already suffer from HD. Currently there is a paucity of HD drug trials in humans, all of which involve drugs already approved for human use for some other ailment. Patients I know are clamoring to participate in drug trials.

I myself am participating in trials to determine the earliest signs of Huntington's, which hopefully will help scientists learn to quickly identify which drugs work to postpone the onset, or which lifestyle changes will affect the age of onset. (I'm a big believer in affecting the onset through lifestyle changes, primarily exercise and stress reduction.)

February 18, 2008

Yesterday on our hike around Cookham Dean we passed by this free-range turkey penal institute centre. There was a sophisticated electric fence around the three structures, to either keep the foxes out or the turkeys in, I'm not sure which. I didn't get close enough to determine if it was on, and the dog stayed well away—she's experienced the shock of an electric fence before, and it's not an experience she wants to repeat.

As you can see, there are no turkeys incarcerated there now but I was told by another rambler that the baby turkeys would arrive in the summer.

In other news, I've been busy with various projects, none of which include blogging (not here, anyway) but I have posted a couple of recipes over at WFB. Later I'll post a most delicious recipe for Tortilla Soup, which does not include any turkey, free-range or otherwise. So don't wait for Wednesday to check it out!

February 12, 2008

Hey, join in the Sorta Super Tuesday voting fun and vote for Roxie and Velma in the Humane Society's Spay Day USA 2008 contest! Roxie and Velma are the cat companions of Diane, frequent commenter and friend of WDIK.

And in this election, unlike those currently taking place in the U.S., you can vote twice!

They are too many unwanted cats and kittens, and puppies taking up room at animal shelters instead of bringing joy to people's lives. So do your part today. Vote, and learn more. And if your dog or cat is not spayed/neutered, make an appointment today. (I'm talking to my friend in Virginia—yes, you! He won't mind, and really—they're not that cute!)

And, on a personal note, having been bitten, twice in one week, by two different unneutered males, I urge you to neuter your dogs. Especially the ones with big teeth.

January 17, 2008

As far as I know, this is the first time any candidate has answered any question about animal rights (other than, possibly, Dennis Kucinich, who is a vegan).

I would probably have asked him this myself, if given a chance, since I'm pretty sure where he stands on other issues, having read his Blueprint for Change. (pdf)

Anyway, here's his answer, and it was a good one:

Obama responded that he cares about animal rights very much, "not only because I have a 9-year-old and 6-year-old who want a dog." He said he sponsored a bill to prevent horse slaughter in the Illinois state Senate and has been repeatedly endorsed by the Humane Society.

"I think how we treat our animals reflects how we treat each other," he said. "And it's very important that we have a president who is mindful of the cruelty that is perpetrated on animals."

It's not like I was impartial before, but I prefer pulling the lever for a candidate who is willing to address issues of animal cruelty, and recognizes the link between our treatment of animals and our treatment of humans.

UPDATE:

Here's something I just read in an excerpt from Obama's book, The Audacity of Hope that gives me hope:

This is not to say that I'm unanchored in my faith. There are some things that I'm absolutely sure about—the Golden Rule, the need to battle cruelty in all its forms, the value of love and charity, humility and grace.

Meanwhile, I think this photo tells us all we need to know about the Republican party's nominee for VP this year.

November 18, 2007

Once again, this year for Thanksgiving I adopted a turkey from Farm Sanctuary. This time, I chose Cicada, a lovely bird with a pale pink neck. I'm so glad she gets to enjoy Thanksgiving with her friends at the Sanctuary, and not on someone's dinner plate. That would really suck.

Go ahead and adopt your own turkey from Farm Sanctuary. But don't worry; when they say "Your request is being processed, and your materials will be shipped within 2 weeks" they don't really mean that.

So don't plan on building a little turkey pen outside, or worry about how to keep your turkey safe from foxes. Or wonder how to tell your husband you're expecting a turkey. Or get the dog excited about her new playmate. And don't invest in a little leash and collar for your turkey either.

Because all you get is a card with a pretty photo of your turkey. It won't follow you around, like Mary's little lamb, but you can be sure your turkey is enjoying life in California.

September 14, 2007

At the end of a week that's been pretty rough for animals here in Britain, I just have to post this link to the most amazing photos (presented in video form; be patient) I've ever seen.

Polar bears. Huskies. Do not be alarmed. All is well.

These lines from Verlyn Klinkenborg, writing in the NY Times on Alex the parrot, seem appropriate:

Scientifically speaking, the value of this research lies in its specific details about patterns of learning and cognition. Ethically speaking, the value lies in our surprise, our renewed awareness of how little we allow ourselves to expect from the animals around us.

Stay tuned; you can expect a pretty cute calf photo to be posted later.